California bans travel to Iowa by athletes, officials

FPI / September 18, 2019

Analysis by Kelli Ballard, LibertyNation.com 

California or bust used to be the theme back in the good ole days, but now it seems the Golden State is bursting at its seams with outraged wokeness. These offended feelings are leading the state toward more and more rules and regulations. With the high cost of living, taxes, influx of illegal immigrants, crime rates, and progressive agenda, California is having a hard time keeping people from moving out, much less attracting new citizens. In fact, the residents of the once envied state are so disgusted with the politics, some are actively trying to split the area into three separate states. And now, State Attorney General Xavier Becerra has added Iowa to its list of states to which no tax-funded travel can occur.  

Iowa joins Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas on the blacklist because of their policies regarding transgendered people and the LGBQT community. Becerra claims the rights of the LGBQT are being denied by these states and therefore California will not allow state employees or school athletes to visit. The move has prompted fundraising for students to be able to attend school and sports functions in these banned areas.

Iowa became the newest state on the list because it denied Medicaid coverage for those seeking gender reassignment surgeries. “The Iowa Legislature has reversed course on what was settled law under the Iowa Civil Rights Act, repealing protections for those seeking gender-affirming health care,” Becerra said. “California has taken an unambiguous stand against discrimination and government actions that would enable it.”

Becerra was referring to the March ruling by Iowa’s Supreme Court that said taxpayers could be forced to pay for gender reassignment surgery, but Governor Kim Reynolds (R-IA) signed a law to the contrary two months later. “This narrow provision simply clarifies that Iowa’s Civil Rights Act does not require taxpayer dollars to pay for sex reassignment and other similar surgeries,” said Pat Garrett, a spokesperson for Reynolds. “This returns us to what had been the state’s position for years.”

In May, the Health and Human Services Department proposed regulations that allowed doctors to choose not to perform certain procedures and operations and said that “gender identity” was not protected under discrimination laws.

Discrimination has become an all-too-familiar word lately. It seems like every story, movie, book, or social media persona has been accused of discriminating against someone for something.

Progressives claim that denying folks medical insurance coverage to change their sex is bigoted. They see the procedure and surgeries as necessary to make people feel comfortable “in their own skin,” so to speak, and that this is necessary for them to be able to conform into society and become a healthy, productive member.

However, protesters claim the procedures are not necessary, but are more of a cosmetic fix that shouldn’t be covered by taxpayers’ hard-earned income. A comparison could be a woman seeking breast enlargement because she feels with a bustier bosom she will fit better into society. Should taxpayers be required to pay for that?

California’s progressiveness continues to grow, and lawmakers are getting too big for their britches. Denying student athletes the chance to compete against rival schools because a state does not approve of spending taxpayers’ money on gender reassignment could be seen as a step too far.

Free Press International